Representation translates into more support for LGBT rights

In a study published in PS: Political Science & Politics, University of California, Riverside researchers found that openly lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) members of the United States Congress took more actions to promote LGB and trans people's rights than non-LGB colleagues with otherwise similar backgrounds.

The conclusion was not an obvious one, as previous studies have shown that elected officials from other minority groups may or may not advocate more strongly for their minority constituents than their non-minority colleagues. In other words, descriptive representation - having representatives in government who look like or share the same background or experiences of the people they serve - may or may not translate into substantive representation - where these representatives work harder for their constituents.

The study is the first of its kind to focus on the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, or trans (LGBT) people in Congress, a small and highly stigmatized group with expected lack of governmental influence.

Study co-author Benjamin Bishin, UCR professor of political science, investigates how groups exercise power in American politics.

"The LGBT community and their political influence is historically understudied, and they are a particularly interesting group to study for understanding and learning about power and the American political system," Bishin said.

In a democracy, where the majority rules, one might expect LGBT people not to fare well. However, with the help of the courts they have made significant policy gains. In 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that all states must recognize same-sex marriages. Other Supreme Court decisions gave further protections including the 2020 decision that prohibited employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.

In parallel, support from the public has been rising. A 2021 Gallup poll showed that 71% of Americans supported gay marriage compared to only 27% in 1996. Although Democrats showed much stronger support, the same poll showed a majority of Republicans were in favor of the right to same-sex marriage. However, there has been limited legislation passed by Congress to expand LGBT rights. And lacking the more solid enshrinement of legislation, court-granted LGBT rights are vulnerable to reversals by future courts.

A challenge faced by Bishin and study co-author Nicholas Weller, UCR associate professor of political science, was the small number of LGB representatives in Congress that made statistical analyses difficult. During the period studied, from 1997 to 2021, 12 openly LGB representatives served in Congress, often with only two serving at any one time. There were no trans representatives.

This also made it unfeasible to measure pro-LGB support by tracking legislators' votes on LGBT-related bills, since sparse LGB representation made it difficult to bring LGBT rights legislation to the floor for voting.

The researchers instead turned to data from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation's largest advocacy group for LGBT, queer, and other sexual and gender identity (LGBTQ+) people. HRC assesses legislators for LGBTQ+ support, using scores from 0-100 that incorporate a wide range of indicators in addition to votes on legislation. Such measures have included votes to confirm pro-LGBTQ+ cabinet officials and judges, and co-sponsorships of proposed legislation that impact LBGTQ+ people.

Further, the researchers needed to evaluate LGB representatives in relation to other members of Congress who were of similar backgrounds. Clearly, comparing an LGB Democrat with an HRC score of 100 with a non-LGB Republican with an HRC score of 0 would not be appropriate. To perform a rigorous study, Bishin and Weller used a method called Coarsened Exact Matching to match LGB with non-LGB legislators who were similar in political behavior and came from similar districts and then compare them. Bishin and Weller's analyses showed that LGB legislators did more to support LGBT rights.

Although the UCR study focused on LGBT-supporting actions of members of Congress, it has been shown that descriptive representation has additional benefits such as cultivating constituents' trust in government and increasing their engagement in the democratic process.

Currently, LGBTQ+ rights are under attack, with the HRC reporting that wide-ranging actions from the federal to state level are creating obstacles to accessing health care and legal recourse for LGBTQ+ people.

The UCR study was not intended to authoritatively answer the question of whether electing LGB representatives to Congress will help protect LGBT rights. But Bishin and Weller's study provides evidence that the answer seems to be in the affirmative.

Header image: Getty Images.